Hi all,

I have a data set containing shape, size (= centroid size), a fixed factor such 
species (three levels) and a fixed factor, nested within species, such 
generation (two levels). After having checked that interaction terms 
size*species and size*generation (species) were not significant, I would 
perform a size correction (= standardization) to my data in order to test for 
ontogenetic scaling and/or lateral transposition. I performed size correction 
to my data as follows.

i) At the intraspecific (static) level, I performed three separated 
standardization of data using the mean shape and size of each species. In all 
the species, the difference expressed as total sum of squares between data in 
shape space and allometry-free residuals equaled the amount of shape variance 
explained by size.

ii) At interspecific (evolutionary) level, using the full data set (not split 
per species) in shape space, I performed size correction using the grand mean 
shape and size. In this instance also, the difference expressed as total sum of 
squares between data in shape space and allometry-free residuals equaled the 
amount of shape variance explained by size.

Have I correctly performed size correction of nested data? 



Thanks in advance,
Michele

-- 
MORPHMET may be accessed via its webpage at http://www.morphometrics.org
--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"MORPHMET" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to morphmet+unsubscr...@morphometrics.org.

Reply via email to